Jack Lemmon in Glengarry Glen Ross
Showing posts with label 1992. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1992. Show all posts
Friday, 20 May 2011
Best Actor 1992: Results
Jack Lemmon in Glengarry Glen Ross
Thursday, 19 May 2011
Best Actor 1992: Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven
Clint Eastwood received his first acting nomination for portraying William Munny in Unforgiven.
Unforgiven tells the story of a reformed retired gunmen called back into the old life for a two man bounty.
Clint Eastwood seems like the only person who could really portray William Munny. One of the reasons for this is because of the previous films Eastwood made in the western genre, particularly as the man with no name in Sergio Leone's westerns. This being Eastwood's last western as well always gives this performance, and character an extra layer, that no other actor could have been able to do in this role.
William Munny is shown first on an isolated pig farm, which William Munny is quite clearly not very good at. Eastwood though although he says very little, already suggests the long brutal life of the character, as well as his the reformed nature of his life, presenting Munny in a rather simple fashion, as a simple man trying his hardest do his work, although still having the right haunted quality as well, which works quite effectively, since he changes quite distinctly from the beginning than to the end of the film.
After joining with a young hot headed would be bounty hunter The Schofield Kid (Jaimz Woolvett), as well as his old friend Ned Logan (Morgan Freeman). In these scenes of travel it is Munny is consistently asked by the Kid about his time as a killer. Eastwood reactions are always on the mark as in Eastwood style he underplays his emotions but still most certainly carries them in subtle fashions through his face, which has Munny past written all over it.
One of Eastwood's biggest challenges come when Munny is struck with sickness from being in the rain, as well as a savage beating from the evil Sheriff Little Bill Daggett (Gene Hackman). Eastwood has to show Munny's delusion with fever. This is quite a challenge, but Eastwood manages to pull it off well, without forcing the pain of Munny's past, but making it abundantly clear. Many actors could have easily overacted this scene, but Eastwood portrays it just the right way.
Munny later finally comes back to killing, but he portrays this exceedingly well because he really does not indicate a great change for Munny yet. Munny compassionately kills the first man, well as compassionately as one can kill a person in that way I suppose, but Eastwood does show a small pain from killing again, but not a enormous one, clearly presenting that Munny has been doing for so long, and so many times, it can never effect past a certian point.
The scene that shows this is his odd not really comfort with the Kid, after the Kid has killed a man for the first time, but creating an understanding of what he did, and what Munny has done time after time. Eastwood does not have a lot of dialogue in this scene, but any more from him could have weakened the scene, because Eastwood shows all the true emotion of killing in his eyes.
Munny though finally breaks out back completely into his old self at the end of the film when he finally confronts Little Bill and his deputies for what they have done. Eastwood's snap back into this completely violent, and revenge driven man is truly freighting, especially due to the contrast of his opening moments. Eastwood transformation is completely believable because of his quite indications throughout the film, and Munny's final scene is a truly powerful, and completely chilling in this striking performance. Eastwood knew of his own cinematic history, and his own abilities as well as limits as an actor, to create a great performance here, one that I think really requires repeat viewings to truly appreciate.
Clint Eastwood seems like the only person who could really portray William Munny. One of the reasons for this is because of the previous films Eastwood made in the western genre, particularly as the man with no name in Sergio Leone's westerns. This being Eastwood's last western as well always gives this performance, and character an extra layer, that no other actor could have been able to do in this role.
William Munny is shown first on an isolated pig farm, which William Munny is quite clearly not very good at. Eastwood though although he says very little, already suggests the long brutal life of the character, as well as his the reformed nature of his life, presenting Munny in a rather simple fashion, as a simple man trying his hardest do his work, although still having the right haunted quality as well, which works quite effectively, since he changes quite distinctly from the beginning than to the end of the film.
After joining with a young hot headed would be bounty hunter The Schofield Kid (Jaimz Woolvett), as well as his old friend Ned Logan (Morgan Freeman). In these scenes of travel it is Munny is consistently asked by the Kid about his time as a killer. Eastwood reactions are always on the mark as in Eastwood style he underplays his emotions but still most certainly carries them in subtle fashions through his face, which has Munny past written all over it.
One of Eastwood's biggest challenges come when Munny is struck with sickness from being in the rain, as well as a savage beating from the evil Sheriff Little Bill Daggett (Gene Hackman). Eastwood has to show Munny's delusion with fever. This is quite a challenge, but Eastwood manages to pull it off well, without forcing the pain of Munny's past, but making it abundantly clear. Many actors could have easily overacted this scene, but Eastwood portrays it just the right way.
Munny later finally comes back to killing, but he portrays this exceedingly well because he really does not indicate a great change for Munny yet. Munny compassionately kills the first man, well as compassionately as one can kill a person in that way I suppose, but Eastwood does show a small pain from killing again, but not a enormous one, clearly presenting that Munny has been doing for so long, and so many times, it can never effect past a certian point.
The scene that shows this is his odd not really comfort with the Kid, after the Kid has killed a man for the first time, but creating an understanding of what he did, and what Munny has done time after time. Eastwood does not have a lot of dialogue in this scene, but any more from him could have weakened the scene, because Eastwood shows all the true emotion of killing in his eyes.
Munny though finally breaks out back completely into his old self at the end of the film when he finally confronts Little Bill and his deputies for what they have done. Eastwood's snap back into this completely violent, and revenge driven man is truly freighting, especially due to the contrast of his opening moments. Eastwood transformation is completely believable because of his quite indications throughout the film, and Munny's final scene is a truly powerful, and completely chilling in this striking performance. Eastwood knew of his own cinematic history, and his own abilities as well as limits as an actor, to create a great performance here, one that I think really requires repeat viewings to truly appreciate.
Best Actor 1992: Robert Downey Jr. in Chaplin
Robert Downey Jr. received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Charles Chaplin in Chaplin.
Chaplin is another by the books biography, effective enough as a whole, but a great film seems possible from the subject matter.
The element that does not seem possible to be greater though is Robert Downey Jr. in the lead role. The biggest challenge to Downey's entire performance as Chaplin is possibly his imitations of Chaplin's film moments as well as his vaudevillian acts. Downey is quite effective in doing both of these. He is firstly a intensely believable as a vaudevillian, and certainly has the spot on timing and ability. In his later portrayal of Chaplin's film sequences he is again completely believable, and accurate to the manner of the real Chaplin. Downey is particularly good in this aspect of Chaplin, because he never really makes it seem that he being overly technically, nor does it feel like an imitation of Chaplin. It instead feels like the actual manner of Chaplin. His recreations capture everything in Chaplin from his certain onscreen energy, his comedic timing, and even his passion in his speech as The Great Dictator. What's so remarkable is how effortless he is in the role. He simply is Chaplin, to the point that nothing is lost or odd when real footage of Chaplin is used in the film. Downey's never just an imitation, he's always an embodiment.
I will say that really that is more than enough of an achievement in a way and it should never bee overlooked. The fact that he manages to be such an iconic cinematic performer is rather astonishing in itself. The rest of his performance is less notable but should not be hand waved at any point. Downey's portrayal of Chaplin as a man, is not an extremely complicated one, but it is an appropriate one. Chaplin does not really undergo any major changes throughout the film, and always stands as an entertainer, and as a man who believes in his message as well. The one major vice the film presents is his involvement women. The film shows his various relationships, but at the same time does not delve overly deep in many of them implying most of them are purely for physical satisfaction, which Downey certainly presents in a realistic fashion, showing that with every relationship Chaplin is always more concerned with himself than other, without overplaying it, suggesting it just as the nature of Chaplin. Other than his relationship Chaplin is portrayed as basically a nice enough man, and Downey gives the part the proper charm. His most major transformation as Chaplin though is that of his aging, as well as just his adjustment into his wealthier position. Downey actually handles both of these aspects quite well, and his development of his accent from working class in the beginning to wealthy end is extremely well handled by Downey and just another part of the man he gets completely right.
His other transformation is his aging which certainly has a lot to do with his makeup which becomes quite heavy near the end of the film. Downey though does not let it do all of the work for him though, and believably wears the make up, and shows his aging in more subtle aging in his voice and physical movements. It has to be said that any aspect that is depicted in regards to the man Downey depicts so effectively and effortlessly. The only thing that holds Downey back is the script. Now to be sure Downey realizes every facet that is there best he can from his more lustful desires to his more noble passions. We are granted a bit of ego, yet Downey works this into his charm to almost override in a way, but in a way that makes sense for Chaplin. Downey in many ways surpasses the role that is of a rather standard, though bad, biopic on the performer and filmmaker. We occasionally scratch below the surface but not enough. Downey always seeks to do so in any margin he has. Of course one should never forget just how impressive it is that he gets away with his replications of Chaplin to begin with. What the film has here is the one man who should play Chaplin, even if the film is not the one film to define the man. Downey is so good in the role that I would hope he is able to reprise it one day in a film at the same level as his performance.
The element that does not seem possible to be greater though is Robert Downey Jr. in the lead role. The biggest challenge to Downey's entire performance as Chaplin is possibly his imitations of Chaplin's film moments as well as his vaudevillian acts. Downey is quite effective in doing both of these. He is firstly a intensely believable as a vaudevillian, and certainly has the spot on timing and ability. In his later portrayal of Chaplin's film sequences he is again completely believable, and accurate to the manner of the real Chaplin. Downey is particularly good in this aspect of Chaplin, because he never really makes it seem that he being overly technically, nor does it feel like an imitation of Chaplin. It instead feels like the actual manner of Chaplin. His recreations capture everything in Chaplin from his certain onscreen energy, his comedic timing, and even his passion in his speech as The Great Dictator. What's so remarkable is how effortless he is in the role. He simply is Chaplin, to the point that nothing is lost or odd when real footage of Chaplin is used in the film. Downey's never just an imitation, he's always an embodiment.
I will say that really that is more than enough of an achievement in a way and it should never bee overlooked. The fact that he manages to be such an iconic cinematic performer is rather astonishing in itself. The rest of his performance is less notable but should not be hand waved at any point. Downey's portrayal of Chaplin as a man, is not an extremely complicated one, but it is an appropriate one. Chaplin does not really undergo any major changes throughout the film, and always stands as an entertainer, and as a man who believes in his message as well. The one major vice the film presents is his involvement women. The film shows his various relationships, but at the same time does not delve overly deep in many of them implying most of them are purely for physical satisfaction, which Downey certainly presents in a realistic fashion, showing that with every relationship Chaplin is always more concerned with himself than other, without overplaying it, suggesting it just as the nature of Chaplin. Other than his relationship Chaplin is portrayed as basically a nice enough man, and Downey gives the part the proper charm. His most major transformation as Chaplin though is that of his aging, as well as just his adjustment into his wealthier position. Downey actually handles both of these aspects quite well, and his development of his accent from working class in the beginning to wealthy end is extremely well handled by Downey and just another part of the man he gets completely right.
His other transformation is his aging which certainly has a lot to do with his makeup which becomes quite heavy near the end of the film. Downey though does not let it do all of the work for him though, and believably wears the make up, and shows his aging in more subtle aging in his voice and physical movements. It has to be said that any aspect that is depicted in regards to the man Downey depicts so effectively and effortlessly. The only thing that holds Downey back is the script. Now to be sure Downey realizes every facet that is there best he can from his more lustful desires to his more noble passions. We are granted a bit of ego, yet Downey works this into his charm to almost override in a way, but in a way that makes sense for Chaplin. Downey in many ways surpasses the role that is of a rather standard, though bad, biopic on the performer and filmmaker. We occasionally scratch below the surface but not enough. Downey always seeks to do so in any margin he has. Of course one should never forget just how impressive it is that he gets away with his replications of Chaplin to begin with. What the film has here is the one man who should play Chaplin, even if the film is not the one film to define the man. Downey is so good in the role that I would hope he is able to reprise it one day in a film at the same level as his performance.
Wednesday, 18 May 2011
Best Actor 1992: Denzel Washington in Malcolm X
Denzel Washington received his third Oscar nomination for portraying the titular character of Malcolm X.
Malcolm X is a pretty much by the book biography film about Malcolm X, I think it is flawed because the film overly idolizes and romanticizes through style Malcolm X's life making even parts of his life that he himself was later critical of look at in an extremely plain and oddly distant fashion.
The film begins with a lesser known aspect of Malcolm, and that is his time as a small time criminal, who commits crimes does drugs, and sleeps with a white woman. This early section is not particularly great, and Washington is hindered by director Spike Lee's overuse of style in these early scenes, such as having Malcolm dress in an over the top fashion, as well have Washington act in a rather over the top fashion especially when he and Lee as Malcolm's friend Shorty walk down the street, or go to a dance where Lee's participates in an overly long self-indulgent dance scene. When the style tones down finally I will admit Washington finally has a better chance at showing a better more developed characterization. I can't say I was overly impressed by these moments either because he frankly does nothing to suggest the future Malcolm whatsoever, which is not necessarily a problem, but he also frankly plays the part in a too calculated fashion that fails to real enforce the idea of Malcolm being a very confused and future less young man. Malcolm frankly is too confidant as a criminal, since Lee romanticizes even this aspect of Malcolm's life to an unneeded extent.
Washington really failed to impress me at all in this first third of Malcolm's life, and I almost felt he was giving a bit of a similar performance he would later do once again in Training Day, though to be fair Washington is very much fulfilling Lee's strange choices during this portion of the film. Well so he goes to prison and here Washington is a bit more effective showing the complete confusion he has in prison, and has the right emotional intensity showing the pain he has due to the result of his aimless life. Well he finds a point through a follower of the brotherhood of Islam who convinces him to take the path set out by Elijah Muhammad. This transformation of Malcolm's should be a place for Washington to shine, but I think the way Lee directs the sequence it really does not allow Washington to do anything impressive with his performance. He does it with too much narration, and again in an oddly distant fashion in which Washington just is not allowed the proper time, or the right scenes to make his transformation compelling.
Well soon afterward he gets out of jail and acts as one of the most loyal followers of Elijah Muhammad and preaches his word in many ways, and in many fashions. Washington is good in doing the Malcolm X speeches, and has the right manner and passion in his speeches. He is properly consistent and effective and is believable in the role. I think he is quite interesting in his way of showing the way Malcolm changes his way in the different venues, and in the speech making part of Malcolm he is effective. Malcolm goes under one more transformation into believing that Elijah Muhammed's ideas were wrong as well. This is another transformation that is too fast, and not invested enough into by Lee as a director, unfortunately leaving Washington trying his best but unfortunately he is not given the right material. For an example his pilgrimage to Mecca is suppose to be a big transforming moment for Malcolm but Lee is more concerned with large shots of various landmarks than of Malcolm transformation, leaving that in the hands of just the voice over, leaving Washington with basically nothing to do but that voice over.
Finally Washington is again effective in the final moments of Malcolm's life showing the exasperation, dread, but along with a still a passion for his cause quite well. Unfortunately Washington gets to spend little time with this aspect of Malcolm but he is good in these final moments. On a whole though this performance just never felt like a complete portrayal of the life of a man due to always being just used by the director in a rather broad fashion not allowing for enough nuance to Malcolm's overall portrayal. Washington performance is mostly believable and effective enough, he is quite good most of the time besides the beginning and does fulfill most of the requirements of this depiction of Malcolm X. The problem though for Washington was the was Malcolm's life was directed, just did not allow for an outstanding performance which it could have been, and Washington probably could have done more with a more performance driven film.
The film begins with a lesser known aspect of Malcolm, and that is his time as a small time criminal, who commits crimes does drugs, and sleeps with a white woman. This early section is not particularly great, and Washington is hindered by director Spike Lee's overuse of style in these early scenes, such as having Malcolm dress in an over the top fashion, as well have Washington act in a rather over the top fashion especially when he and Lee as Malcolm's friend Shorty walk down the street, or go to a dance where Lee's participates in an overly long self-indulgent dance scene. When the style tones down finally I will admit Washington finally has a better chance at showing a better more developed characterization. I can't say I was overly impressed by these moments either because he frankly does nothing to suggest the future Malcolm whatsoever, which is not necessarily a problem, but he also frankly plays the part in a too calculated fashion that fails to real enforce the idea of Malcolm being a very confused and future less young man. Malcolm frankly is too confidant as a criminal, since Lee romanticizes even this aspect of Malcolm's life to an unneeded extent.
Washington really failed to impress me at all in this first third of Malcolm's life, and I almost felt he was giving a bit of a similar performance he would later do once again in Training Day, though to be fair Washington is very much fulfilling Lee's strange choices during this portion of the film. Well so he goes to prison and here Washington is a bit more effective showing the complete confusion he has in prison, and has the right emotional intensity showing the pain he has due to the result of his aimless life. Well he finds a point through a follower of the brotherhood of Islam who convinces him to take the path set out by Elijah Muhammad. This transformation of Malcolm's should be a place for Washington to shine, but I think the way Lee directs the sequence it really does not allow Washington to do anything impressive with his performance. He does it with too much narration, and again in an oddly distant fashion in which Washington just is not allowed the proper time, or the right scenes to make his transformation compelling.
Well soon afterward he gets out of jail and acts as one of the most loyal followers of Elijah Muhammad and preaches his word in many ways, and in many fashions. Washington is good in doing the Malcolm X speeches, and has the right manner and passion in his speeches. He is properly consistent and effective and is believable in the role. I think he is quite interesting in his way of showing the way Malcolm changes his way in the different venues, and in the speech making part of Malcolm he is effective. Malcolm goes under one more transformation into believing that Elijah Muhammed's ideas were wrong as well. This is another transformation that is too fast, and not invested enough into by Lee as a director, unfortunately leaving Washington trying his best but unfortunately he is not given the right material. For an example his pilgrimage to Mecca is suppose to be a big transforming moment for Malcolm but Lee is more concerned with large shots of various landmarks than of Malcolm transformation, leaving that in the hands of just the voice over, leaving Washington with basically nothing to do but that voice over.
Finally Washington is again effective in the final moments of Malcolm's life showing the exasperation, dread, but along with a still a passion for his cause quite well. Unfortunately Washington gets to spend little time with this aspect of Malcolm but he is good in these final moments. On a whole though this performance just never felt like a complete portrayal of the life of a man due to always being just used by the director in a rather broad fashion not allowing for enough nuance to Malcolm's overall portrayal. Washington performance is mostly believable and effective enough, he is quite good most of the time besides the beginning and does fulfill most of the requirements of this depiction of Malcolm X. The problem though for Washington was the was Malcolm's life was directed, just did not allow for an outstanding performance which it could have been, and Washington probably could have done more with a more performance driven film.
Best Actor 1992: Stephen Rea in The Crying Game
Stephen Rea received his only Oscar nomination so far for portraying Fergus in The Crying Game.
Well this revision, well re-write, does not come quite as the other ones I have done so far. Even from the same set of nominees, I will admit I just didn't give Robert Downey Jr. quite enough credit for what he did in Chaplin, though my thoughts did not exactly change, but with Stephen Rea in this film it is something different. Film is always an interesting medium as how one watches a film is an integral part of the film. Now this can be in a more obvious way, like if you're tired or distracted, but I don't mean that. I also am not referring to appreciating a film a second or third time, when knowing where the journey ends, can often lead to appreciating the journey itself more. Now that second point is true for The Crying Game, but it is still not what I mean when it comes to Stephen Rea's performance. There is the how in terms of who you are, where you are, what you have experienced in your life, or have witnessed in others that can change your view or appreciation to a film or performance. Now I entirely believed in my positive yet rather indifferent original review but now I can say where I stand currently that I was quite wrong in my original assessment.
Although the twist involving Jaye Davidson's Dill was perhaps what helped make the film the mainstream success it was in its day, it's Rea's portrayal of Fergus that makes the film. On the surface it begins as though it is any IRA related film as we follow an IRA group including Fergus, and his sorta girlfriend Jude (Miranda Richardson), as they kidnap a British soldier Jody (Forest Whittaker) for the purpose of releasing IRA prisoners though more likely a retribution killing. In his first scene we appear to see the underground soldier as Rea projects the blunt edge of such a man as he helps to take in Jody. The few succeeding scenes Rea makes Fergus appear to be the good soldier only during the easy act of taking the prisoner but not actually holding him. What follows though is where we see what Rea does in the role throughout the film in his realization of Fergus, which is something truly remarkable. This all begins when Fergus is initially assigned to watch Jody, who is originally hooded to prevent him from seeing anything, but eventually that comes after he reveals a fairly accurate description of Fergus from their brief interaction.
Now the initial acceptance of Jody, as more than a prisoner one can see what is so marvelous in Rea's performance. It is as Fergus is just speaking to Jody and as they speak not about hatred, or any sort of relation to the conflict there is but a brief smile in Rea's face. Rea's reaction though realizes this acceptances of this man as another human being with such simplicity yet such power. Rea makes no mind of it yet finds this in such a notable way. Afterward though we see Fergus as he asks about removing the hood, and here we perhaps already begin to see who really Fergus is as a man. There is an eagerness Rea brings just as man who wants to be able to help another human being, not as a soldier just trying to make things easier for himself in some way. In the succeeding scenes of Fergus watching over Jody Rea is excellent in portraying only a growing comfort and appreciation of a worthwhile human being. There is nothing forced within this, but rather through the ease of Rea's work that you can find it. Every glance of affection or word of kindness Rea brings a quiet honesty to.
In every second we spend with Fergus, Rea expresses such decency in such a vivid unassuming way. It is not in a single reaction but every reaction and interaction he has that Rea shows us the man that is Fergus. Even in his time with the amoral Jude, Rea portrays Fergus almost looking for any goodness in their tender moments together. The focus though ends up being with the man he's meant to hate. As their time nears an end Rea makes these moments of real friendship all the more poignant as he internalizes so effectively the building dread within his eyes as he speaks to the man. As he offers any words of comfort asking Jody not to think of the worst happening, it is within Rea's eyes his own sadness of thinking of the worst as well. Rea makes this all the more tragic though by making the connection so real. It is deeply moving when Fergus promises to seek out Jody girlfriend dill, or when he tells Jody a final story from his own past as it is earned by what Rea brings to the role. When the actual execution is to be done Rea's expression carries such weight pain as he essentially shows Fergus playing performing the act in his mind, being unable to carry it out.
The fallout of the botched plan by the IRA leaves Fergus alone to flee to London to apparently seek out Jody's love. Now the film's second act again tests Fergus though in a different way. It begins as though this is simply like the earlier film Cal with an IRA member attempting to make amends, but ends up in a guilt ridden relationship with the love of his "victim". Now to be sure Rea is great in these scenes by showing the awkwardness of the interactions. Rea is brilliantly awkward though again but just how natural he is in this. He reveals the protective streak of honoring Jody's request, but as well a general interest. He cloaks though every moment with a certain shyness that reflects his guilt over what has happens. Dill's own eagerness though pulls Fergus in further and everything seems set for a proper romance until Fergus finds Dill isn't quite who he expected through the famous twist. That twist though shouldn't overshadow what is really more important which is how it plays into Fergus's personal story. That story that continues because Fergus continues to fulfill his duty by watching over Dill, even though there is no longer a chance for a more intimate romance in his mind.
Now the following scenes continued to be so effectively portrayed by Rea in portraying the man being who he is, the only way he can be. Again now there is a different awkwardness, though the shame is still there, as he interacts with Dill who is still eager for a physical romance though Fergus cannot comply with that truly. Rea presents this as the man Fergus is. There is frustration, particularly after the initial revelation, yet in his reactions he shows the man still unable not to emphasize or well do the decent thing no matter where it brings him. Rea's work is this incredible realization of the central theme of a man behaving by his nature, featured in the story of the frog and the scorpion as regaled by Jody early in the film. This would later also be used in Drive, but there the driver was a man unable to escape his violent nature, this film follows a man unable to escape his good nature. The idea of being a good man seems perhaps easy enough, but maybe not so with Fergus going through the rather extreme circumstances revealed in every act of the film. Rea takes this beyond any idea through his performance that always captures a definite reality, and truth in the depiction of this man who always does the right thing, in his mind anyways. Rea's work that is in every second of his performance, not an expression or line wasted. It is not about any single moment but every moment. I have admit wrongdoing by not seeing just what Rea does through every scene, as he finds so much within that idea, and humanizes so beautifully. In every re-watch Rea's portrait of this man has only resonated more, creating such a emotional impact in every scene, that makes the film a far deeper and richer experience than the one suggested by the twist that defined its original notoriety.
Although the twist involving Jaye Davidson's Dill was perhaps what helped make the film the mainstream success it was in its day, it's Rea's portrayal of Fergus that makes the film. On the surface it begins as though it is any IRA related film as we follow an IRA group including Fergus, and his sorta girlfriend Jude (Miranda Richardson), as they kidnap a British soldier Jody (Forest Whittaker) for the purpose of releasing IRA prisoners though more likely a retribution killing. In his first scene we appear to see the underground soldier as Rea projects the blunt edge of such a man as he helps to take in Jody. The few succeeding scenes Rea makes Fergus appear to be the good soldier only during the easy act of taking the prisoner but not actually holding him. What follows though is where we see what Rea does in the role throughout the film in his realization of Fergus, which is something truly remarkable. This all begins when Fergus is initially assigned to watch Jody, who is originally hooded to prevent him from seeing anything, but eventually that comes after he reveals a fairly accurate description of Fergus from their brief interaction.
Now the initial acceptance of Jody, as more than a prisoner one can see what is so marvelous in Rea's performance. It is as Fergus is just speaking to Jody and as they speak not about hatred, or any sort of relation to the conflict there is but a brief smile in Rea's face. Rea's reaction though realizes this acceptances of this man as another human being with such simplicity yet such power. Rea makes no mind of it yet finds this in such a notable way. Afterward though we see Fergus as he asks about removing the hood, and here we perhaps already begin to see who really Fergus is as a man. There is an eagerness Rea brings just as man who wants to be able to help another human being, not as a soldier just trying to make things easier for himself in some way. In the succeeding scenes of Fergus watching over Jody Rea is excellent in portraying only a growing comfort and appreciation of a worthwhile human being. There is nothing forced within this, but rather through the ease of Rea's work that you can find it. Every glance of affection or word of kindness Rea brings a quiet honesty to.
In every second we spend with Fergus, Rea expresses such decency in such a vivid unassuming way. It is not in a single reaction but every reaction and interaction he has that Rea shows us the man that is Fergus. Even in his time with the amoral Jude, Rea portrays Fergus almost looking for any goodness in their tender moments together. The focus though ends up being with the man he's meant to hate. As their time nears an end Rea makes these moments of real friendship all the more poignant as he internalizes so effectively the building dread within his eyes as he speaks to the man. As he offers any words of comfort asking Jody not to think of the worst happening, it is within Rea's eyes his own sadness of thinking of the worst as well. Rea makes this all the more tragic though by making the connection so real. It is deeply moving when Fergus promises to seek out Jody girlfriend dill, or when he tells Jody a final story from his own past as it is earned by what Rea brings to the role. When the actual execution is to be done Rea's expression carries such weight pain as he essentially shows Fergus playing performing the act in his mind, being unable to carry it out.
The fallout of the botched plan by the IRA leaves Fergus alone to flee to London to apparently seek out Jody's love. Now the film's second act again tests Fergus though in a different way. It begins as though this is simply like the earlier film Cal with an IRA member attempting to make amends, but ends up in a guilt ridden relationship with the love of his "victim". Now to be sure Rea is great in these scenes by showing the awkwardness of the interactions. Rea is brilliantly awkward though again but just how natural he is in this. He reveals the protective streak of honoring Jody's request, but as well a general interest. He cloaks though every moment with a certain shyness that reflects his guilt over what has happens. Dill's own eagerness though pulls Fergus in further and everything seems set for a proper romance until Fergus finds Dill isn't quite who he expected through the famous twist. That twist though shouldn't overshadow what is really more important which is how it plays into Fergus's personal story. That story that continues because Fergus continues to fulfill his duty by watching over Dill, even though there is no longer a chance for a more intimate romance in his mind.
Now the following scenes continued to be so effectively portrayed by Rea in portraying the man being who he is, the only way he can be. Again now there is a different awkwardness, though the shame is still there, as he interacts with Dill who is still eager for a physical romance though Fergus cannot comply with that truly. Rea presents this as the man Fergus is. There is frustration, particularly after the initial revelation, yet in his reactions he shows the man still unable not to emphasize or well do the decent thing no matter where it brings him. Rea's work is this incredible realization of the central theme of a man behaving by his nature, featured in the story of the frog and the scorpion as regaled by Jody early in the film. This would later also be used in Drive, but there the driver was a man unable to escape his violent nature, this film follows a man unable to escape his good nature. The idea of being a good man seems perhaps easy enough, but maybe not so with Fergus going through the rather extreme circumstances revealed in every act of the film. Rea takes this beyond any idea through his performance that always captures a definite reality, and truth in the depiction of this man who always does the right thing, in his mind anyways. Rea's work that is in every second of his performance, not an expression or line wasted. It is not about any single moment but every moment. I have admit wrongdoing by not seeing just what Rea does through every scene, as he finds so much within that idea, and humanizes so beautifully. In every re-watch Rea's portrait of this man has only resonated more, creating such a emotional impact in every scene, that makes the film a far deeper and richer experience than the one suggested by the twist that defined its original notoriety.
Tuesday, 17 May 2011
Best Actor 1992: Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman
Al Pacino won his Oscar from his eighth nomination for portraying Lieutenant Colonel Frank Slade in Scent of a Woman.
Scent of a Woman is a film about a young prep school student Charley (Chris O'Donnell) who takes a job caring for a blind depressed and flamboyant soldier.
Al Pacino win he is one generally characterized as a make up win, and that certainly is a valid statement considering this is still is his last nomination at the moment, and he had last seven times previously including once the very same year. Pacino's performance here also seemed to have a detrimental effect on his performances from than on since many of his performances seemed to be some sort of a variation on this performance.
This performance is not usually liked, and is many times mocked for being an Oscar grabbing sort of performance. There is perhaps truth to that second aspect, since after all he plays a blind man, who is going over some serious emotional troubles. Well the blindness part of his performance, in which he stares blankly at nothing, has been given both criticism as well as praise, I really can't say it matters too much either way, since he technically could have worn sunglasses, or the blindness causing contact lenses it is only really a small part of his performance that does not contribute much, nor does it take away from the overall effect of his performance.
This is actually a bit of a mixed performance for me in that there are many aspects of his performance that seem much too calculated. I think this is the most obvious when he has his big yelling scenes, particularly in his final speech at the end of the film. He uses this southern accent only some of the time, and it is rather random if he decides to use it or not, and I think most of the time he tends not to, and frankly he is better when he does not do the accent.
Pacino has plenty of the yelling scenes in fact most of the performance is him yelling, but the idea of yelling alone does not make a performance good nor bad, since some characters are suppose to yell and Frank Slade certainly is one of them. I think Pacino is really hit and miss in many of his yelling scenes, and I do think he is effectively entertaining some of the time when he properly finds the flow of his character, but other times he is overly calculated in his performance.
Pacino does have some quieter scenes, or at least as quiet as they can be for Frank Slade. I really do not think he always overacts, since I do think Pacino successfully shows that his constant yelling his basically his way to compensate for his blindness, although sometimes he does such as in his final speech where he seems to be reciting the lines in his head a little too much, but even in that scene I think goes back and forth in terms of the strength of his performance.
Pacino I do think succeeds with Slade some or even much of the time, in giving a charming performance, and although the crazy mentor character is possibly a bit much, I thought he did make him work in some scenes fairly well. I thought particularly in the big tango scene where he is properly magnetic and effective. Pacino though also I do think effectively shows the pathos of the character, and how his connection with Charley is something special to Slade, without forcing it too much.
This is a performance that was rather difficult for me to write to be honest, because I think it is an entirely inconsistent performance for me. Sometimes he does certainly go over the top, and is overdone in his "acting, but other moments I think he finds a way for his loud character to work rather well. So really this is a performance I do like, but I most certainly have many reservations about.
Al Pacino win he is one generally characterized as a make up win, and that certainly is a valid statement considering this is still is his last nomination at the moment, and he had last seven times previously including once the very same year. Pacino's performance here also seemed to have a detrimental effect on his performances from than on since many of his performances seemed to be some sort of a variation on this performance.
This performance is not usually liked, and is many times mocked for being an Oscar grabbing sort of performance. There is perhaps truth to that second aspect, since after all he plays a blind man, who is going over some serious emotional troubles. Well the blindness part of his performance, in which he stares blankly at nothing, has been given both criticism as well as praise, I really can't say it matters too much either way, since he technically could have worn sunglasses, or the blindness causing contact lenses it is only really a small part of his performance that does not contribute much, nor does it take away from the overall effect of his performance.
This is actually a bit of a mixed performance for me in that there are many aspects of his performance that seem much too calculated. I think this is the most obvious when he has his big yelling scenes, particularly in his final speech at the end of the film. He uses this southern accent only some of the time, and it is rather random if he decides to use it or not, and I think most of the time he tends not to, and frankly he is better when he does not do the accent.
Pacino has plenty of the yelling scenes in fact most of the performance is him yelling, but the idea of yelling alone does not make a performance good nor bad, since some characters are suppose to yell and Frank Slade certainly is one of them. I think Pacino is really hit and miss in many of his yelling scenes, and I do think he is effectively entertaining some of the time when he properly finds the flow of his character, but other times he is overly calculated in his performance.
Pacino does have some quieter scenes, or at least as quiet as they can be for Frank Slade. I really do not think he always overacts, since I do think Pacino successfully shows that his constant yelling his basically his way to compensate for his blindness, although sometimes he does such as in his final speech where he seems to be reciting the lines in his head a little too much, but even in that scene I think goes back and forth in terms of the strength of his performance.
Pacino I do think succeeds with Slade some or even much of the time, in giving a charming performance, and although the crazy mentor character is possibly a bit much, I thought he did make him work in some scenes fairly well. I thought particularly in the big tango scene where he is properly magnetic and effective. Pacino though also I do think effectively shows the pathos of the character, and how his connection with Charley is something special to Slade, without forcing it too much.
This is a performance that was rather difficult for me to write to be honest, because I think it is an entirely inconsistent performance for me. Sometimes he does certainly go over the top, and is overdone in his "acting, but other moments I think he finds a way for his loud character to work rather well. So really this is a performance I do like, but I most certainly have many reservations about.
Monday, 16 May 2011
Best Actor 1992
Robert Downey Jr. in Chaplin
Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven
Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman
Stephen Rea in The Crying Game
Denzel Washington in Malcolm X
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)